* Jason Haar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:58:41AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > > > Because current clamd implementation is not to "die" on > > > memory allocation error, but sleep. > > > > It doesn't die, it's being killed by the kernel. > > No - clamd does a malloc and that fails. Then instead of dying (which would > be the proper thing to do IMHO), it sleeps a few microsecs and then tries to > malloc the memory again. Infinite loop occurs...
Ok, THAT's bad - and should be fixed. > [people running softlimits would almost invariably also be calling clamd > under a supervise script, so if clamd died, it would be auto-restarted. > That's the condition we are trying to achieve] Yep. -- Ralf Hildebrandt (i.A. des IT-Zentrum) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charite - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 Gemeinsame Einrichtung von FU- und HU-Berlin Fax. +49 (0)30-450 570-916 IT-Zentrum Standort CBF AIM. ralfpostfix ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: thawte's Crypto Challenge Vl Crack the code and win a Sony DCRHC40 MiniDV Digital Handycam Camcorder. More prizes in the weekly Lunch Hour Challenge. Sign up NOW http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;10740251;10262165;m _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
